Yang v WorkCover Queensland
[2022] QSC 56 · Bowskill CJ
A worker suffered a stroke at his workplace and successfully claimed workers' compensation on the basis that work stress significantly contributed to it. WorkCover later obtained a doctor's report assessing his whole-person impairment at 90% but attributing all of it to long-standing untreated high blood pressure and none to work, giving him a 0% work-related impairment. WorkCover issued a notice saying he had no permanent impairment and stopped his payments. He challenged those decisions, but before the hearing WorkCover withdrew (repealed) them and offered a fresh assessment by a new doctor. The worker instead pressed for a court order forcing WorkCover to issue a notice recording a 90% impairment. The court refused. Because the decisions no longer existed, it had no power to make the order, and in any case it would be artificial to accept part of the doctor's report while ignoring the rest. The application was dismissed, with WorkCover ordered to pay the worker's costs.
Incident & injury
Worker suffered a stroke (right basal ganglion haemorrhagic CVA) at work; workplace stress claimed as a significant contributing factor.
- Body regions
- Brain / head, Head
- Diagnoses
- Right basal ganglion haemorrhagic stroke (CVA), Left-sided dense hemiplegia
- Incident date
- 17 August 2020
Quick facts
- Date of judgment
- 13 April 2022
- Claim type
- WCRA Statutory
- Proceeding
- Interlocutory
- Plaintiff outcome
- Unsuccessful
- Plaintiff age at injury
- ~49 (inferred)
- Occupation
- Painter and manager of painting and decorating business Technician / Trade Worker
Outcome
The applicant sought judicial review of WorkCover's notice of assessment (0% DPI) and cessation of compensation; WorkCover repealed both decisions before hearing. The court dismissed the application, finding it had no power to direct issue of a 90% notice of assessment once the decisions no longer existed, and that it would in any event be inappropriate to selectively adopt part of the doctor's report. WorkCover ordered to pay the applicant's costs.
Key issues
Yang v WorkCover Queensland [2022] QSC 56
When typing in a Word document, italicise the case name. The copy button copies plain text suitable for any editor.